ironhorse Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I know all the debate about Ford going into the diesel 1/2 ton arena...its pros and cons,but I really think Ford missed the boat on this one. There is demand for a 1/2 ton diesel,Dodge saw it and acted on it, Ford didn't. I think it was a missed opportunity for the Blue Oval. Link: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/07/07/chrysler-ram-jeep-diesel/12300971/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Dodge chose diesel. Ford chose ecoboost. Would you rather have Ford's ecoboost sales (which at a 50% take rate puts them around 300K/yr) or Dodge's diesel sales? I doubt there are many incremental F150 diesel sales for Ford to garner with a small diesel. If there are then Ford has a diesel drivetrain readily available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 If there are then Ford has a diesel drivetrain readily available. Many people do not know that Ford HAS a small V* diesel, the 4.4L that they are building for Land Rover. One engineer at Ford told me the 4.4L is actually a much better engine for the F250 (lighter) than the 6.8L, but the low volume on 2 different diesel engines would cause both to be more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Ram's 1/2 ton diesel truck gets EPA 28 mpg, what's the bet that the 2015 Aluminum F150 with 2.7 EB will get similar while reaching far more buyers than a diesel ever could... Yes, Ford is missing out on diesel sales now but the next gen F150 wil secure far more mainstream gasoline sales than simply the 10% or so that would choose an efficient diesel option. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted July 8, 2014 Author Share Posted July 8, 2014 Many here,talk out of both sides...when we talk about low volume vehicles like Flex,or small volume sales like Taurus SHO, we hear about how it's not about volume,it's about the huge profitability,and getting people into the brand. When the diesel 1/2 ton is mentioned, all the talk is about how diesel is too low volume,the take rates are too low, and we should only worry about the majority of the customers that don't want a diesel 1/2 ton. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Many here,talk out of both sides...when we talk about low volume vehicles like Flex,or small volume sales like Taurus SHO, we hear about how it's not about volume,it's about the huge profitability,and getting people into the brand. When the diesel 1/2 ton is mentioned, all the talk is about how diesel is too low volume,the take rates are too low, and we should only worry about the majority of the customers that don't want a diesel 1/2 ton. Interesting. Nobody here thinks the Flex was justified for such small volume. But once it was built then the high ATPs and conquest sales were enough to justify keeping it short term, but we don't think it deserves any further investment. SHO doesn't really compete with other Taurus drivetrains or Ford products. A 4.4L Diesel F150 would compete with 2.7L EB and 3.5L EB sales. You have to look at it in perspective and in context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Many here,talk out of both sides...when we talk about low volume vehicles like Flex,or small volume sales like Taurus SHO, we hear about how it's not about volume,it's about the huge profitability,and getting people into the brand. When the diesel 1/2 ton is mentioned, all the talk is about how diesel is too low volume,the take rates are too low, and we should only worry about the majority of the customers that don't want a diesel 1/2 ton. Interesting. The difference is whether or not a diesel F150 would bring in buyers that it's not already getting. The Flex and SHO do, whereas a diesel F150 may just take buyers away from those who would have opted for an Ecoboost F150 anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 According to the AN source article ( http://www.autonews.com/article/20140707/OEM01/307079960/chrysler-seeks-more-diesels ), VM Motori can produce up to 100K diesels per year, with roughly half destined for NA. That's a max of ~50K units. Ford's increase in annual sales from 2012 to 2013 was well over 100K units, and they sold 60K F-Series trucks in June. Ram is so far behind Ford and GM that 50K diesels can move the needle for them; on Ford's volume, not so much... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) The News says engine maker VM Motori has the capacity to make 100,000 diesels a year. Half of them could come to the U.S. 50K units constitute a hit (10% out of two products combined that sell over 1/2 million units a year???) Ha! Sounds like a PR piece from FiatChrysler. Edited July 8, 2014 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Also, what are FCA's margins on this 'hit'--are they as good as they are on other Ram engines and trims? I'm inclined to doubt they are, given that FCA restricted availability to their highest margin (most expensive) trims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 5 years ago I would have bought a diesel F150. Today, I would go EB. Take the towing improvements with EB over a standard gasser, add in the improved fuel economy (even if only when not towing) of the EB over a regular gasser, then figure in the higher cost of diesel fuel vs. gas, not to mention the lower diesel fuel economy after the emissions standards of '07, and EB seems to be the real winner for those who look at their purchases logically and not just the 'I want a diesel' crowd. Would you rather have 365 HP / 420 ft-lbs for $1500 or 240 HP / 420 ft-lbs for $2800, each having very similar per mile costs after purchase and similar torque curves? I've been a diesel proponent for quite a while (heck, I own one), but if Ford offered both in their F150 and I was in the market for an F150, I would opt for the EB. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted July 8, 2014 Author Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) Very legitimate points..however Dodge can offer something at a price point that customers want. The "I want a Diesel" crowd is perhaps larger than many think. A whole lot of customers do not buy based on logic. There is demand...now Dodge may not be able to meet demand,and that can create a perception of success...and hence, breed more demand. Edited July 8, 2014 by ironhorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Apparently it's nowhere near as large as the "I want an Ecoboost" crowd............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Very legitimate points..however Dodge can offer something at a price point that customers want. The "I want a Diesel" crowd is perhaps larger than many think. A whole lot of customers do not buy based on logic. There is demand...now Dodge may not be able to meet demand,and that can create a perception of success...and hence, breed more demand. I agree that a lot of customers do not buy on logic. But wouldn't those people that just want a diesel go ahead and buy a 3/4 ton truck if it's not available in the half ton of their choice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 .however Dodge can offer something at a price point that customers want. But the diesel is only available on the highest trim levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Reverse headline: Ford 1/2 ton Ecoboost a hit. Did Ram miss the boat? 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) The article is misleading because it doesn't say what FCA plan on doing with the additional diesel V6 it is trying to buy from VM. For all we know, it could be to increase Grand Cherokee output (export business) and has nothing to do with Ram. Jeep Grand Cherokee sold outside North America and China are basically all diesel... and it is a high margin profitable car for the Jeep brand in key markets. The article is drawing fake inferences in a clickbait article to hook in people like ironhorse to repost it. Edited July 8, 2014 by bzcat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 5 years ago I would have bought a diesel F150. Today, I would go EB. Take the towing improvements with EB over a standard gasser, add in the improved fuel economy (even if only when not towing) of the EB over a regular gasser, then figure in the higher cost of diesel fuel vs. gas, not to mention the lower diesel fuel economy after the emissions standards of '07, and EB seems to be the real winner for those who look at their purchases logically and not just the 'I want a diesel' crowd. Would you rather have 365 HP / 420 ft-lbs for $1500 or 240 HP / 420 ft-lbs for $2800, each having very similar per mile costs after purchase and similar torque curves? I've been a diesel proponent for quite a while (heck, I own one), but if Ford offered both in their F150 and I was in the market for an F150, I would opt for the EB. build it..I GUARANTEE that people that actually DO tow all the time, and want better mileage would come...its REALLY simple...a Diesel loses a minute amount of mileage under load compared to a Gas engine, ESPECIALLY if that engine is turboed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I agree that a lot of customers do not buy on logic. But wouldn't those people that just want a diesel go ahead and buy a 3/4 ton truck if it's not available in the half ton of their choice? 1 word...refinement. I would MUCH rather have a 1/2 ton as a daily vehicle than the Superduty. Then theres size, parking, ride, cost...sorry thats now 5 words.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Ford has had a diesel in the 15 F150 for a while now testing. I am sure if Ford thinks there is a big enough market where it will not hurt other sales then they will go ahead with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Bad article with no facts, it says its a hit, what do THEY define as a "hit? To me if it's not 25% of your unit sales, then its not a hit to me. Also, Chevy should be the one worrying nipping at it's feet, not so much on Ford...Ford should just look and glare over like a trophy wife would look at the help, but not as if she were a college aged nanny either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 build it..I GUARANTEE that people that actually DO tow all the time, and want better mileage would come...its REALLY simple...a Diesel loses a minute amount of mileage under load compared to a Gas engine, ESPECIALLY if that engine is turboed. But people that tow enough weight to matter ALL THE TIME do not drive half ton trucks. Some do, sure, but most move up to 3/4 tons. And I can attest to the fact that diesel fuel mileage while towing is not what it used to be. It barely makes up the difference for the extra cost in fuel. 1 word...refinement. I would MUCH rather have a 1/2 ton as a daily vehicle than the Superduty. Then theres size, parking, ride, cost...sorry thats now 5 words.... I can't say I disagree, but remember, we were throwing logic out the window. I've had both, and for daily driver, I much prefer the F150. For stability while towing, the SD wins, hands down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The article is misleading because it doesn't say what FCA plan on doing with the additional diesel V6 it is trying to buy from VM. Doesn't FCA own VM outright now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 But people that tow enough weight to matter ALL THE TIME do not drive half ton trucks. Some do, sure, but most move up to 3/4 tons. And I can attest to the fact that diesel fuel mileage while towing is not what it used to be. It barely makes up the difference for the extra cost in fuel. I can't say I disagree, but remember, we were throwing logic out the window. I've had both, and for daily driver, I much prefer the F150. For stability while towing, the SD wins, hands down. not sure I agree, theres plenty of contractors and the like that I cater to, that regularly tow close to 10000 pounds with F-150s....then theres tha Recreational group that weekly tow $20000 plus of toys to and from the desert, think someone with $20k plus of toys couldnt afford a 4-5k bump for a diesel?.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 not sure I agree, theres plenty of contractors and the like that I cater to, that regularly tow close to 10000 pounds with F-150s....then theres tha Recreational group that weekly tow $20000 plus of toys to and from the desert, think someone with $20k plus of toys couldnt afford a 4-5k bump for a diesel?.... I guess I was speaking for what I see around here. The big loads are towed with 3/4 ton trucks. Even the travel trailers and fifth wheels that I see in campgrounds (except the lighter ones) are normally towed by 3/4 ton and larger trucks. And if you have to spend that extra 4-5k bump for the diesel, now you can only afford $15k for toys instead of $20k. Unless you have unlimited income, which most folks don't. Here is my scenario. When I purchased my '08 F250, I went used because I couldn't swing a new truck (not couldn't, but didn't want to spend the extra). If Ford offered an EB in the F250 for $7k less than the diesel option, I would have bought new instead of used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.